Spinal manipulation provided better short and long-term functional improvement, and more pain relief in the follow-up than either back school or individual physiotherapy.

Objective. Comparing global postural reeducation (GPR) to a standard physiotherapy treatment (PT) based on active exercises, stretching, and massaging for improving pain and function in chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients. Design. Prospective controlled study. Setting. Outpatient rehabilitation facility. Participants. Adult patients with diagnosis of nonspecific, chronic (>6 months) low back pain. Interventions. Both treatments consisted of 15 sessions of one hour each, twice a week including patient education. Measures. Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire to evaluate disability, and Numeric Analog Scale for pain. A score change >30% was considered clinically significant. Past treatments, use of medications, smoking habits, height, weight, profession, and physical activity were also recorded on baseline, on discharge, and 1 year after discharge (resp., T0, T1, and T2). Results. At T0 103 patients with cLBP (51 cases and 52 controls) were recruited. The treatment (T1) has been completed by 79 (T1) of which 60 then carried out the 1-year follow-up (T2). Both GPR and PT at T1 were associated with a significant statistical and clinical improvement in pain and function, compared to T0. At T2, only pain in GPR still registered a statistically significant improvement.

The objective of this prospective randomized controlled study was to compare the long-term effects of a structured physical activity intervention with those of aerobic exercises alone, in a cohort of elderly patients who had undergone elective cardiac surgery, and who were classified as frail at the end of rehabilitation based on their Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) score. At the end of rehabilitation, 140 frail elderly patients were randomly allocated either to the intervention group (IG) or to the control group (CG). CG participants received the usual aerobic exercise prescription, while IG participants were also taught additional exercises for strength, flexibility, balance and coordination. The improvement in SPPB score after 1 year was the outcome of the study. IG showed a significant improvement in SPPB score (9.0 ± 1.1 vs. 7.7 ± 1.4, p \ 0.001), while no significant change was found in CG (7.7 ± 1.6 vs. 7.6 ± 1.5, p = 0.252). IG also showed a significantly higher proportion of participants who improved their SPPB score of at least 1 point (70 vs. 37%, p \ 0.001). In conclusions, our structured physical activity intervention significantly improves the SPPB score in frail elderly patients who have undergone elective cardiac surgery. An intervention that improves the SPPB score might delay the occurrence of mobility disability.

No abstract